Seems odd that we went to visit the Archive at MS with the intention of thinking about the Poly-Technics first publication: "We're having difficulty describing what we do" when in fact, of course, we got caught up in the auras of objects, artefacts and books. We talked of  how if historically you were morally good Ruskin would then allow people to handle the minerals, which was made more funny by the fact a large mineral from the current handling section of a display had been stolen, so we saw the gap - a perfect metaphor it seemed but hey,....

The visit was really useful and good, I felt lucky to be able to call this our job. Louise [curator] was passionate and insightful - 8 years cataloging the collection has left her with what seems like extra sensory ruskin perception. As usual, as Steve would say, i was made sad by art i like - a tear or two was shed; the second time that week, the first being for a Ted Hughes poem. I said to Mir in the pub later that to be moved to tears by art twice in a week was pretty good going - perhaps im getting soft, especially when, like Steves post about the sunset, im usually massively disapointed or perhaps thats cynical?  It was a painting of a length of Blackthorn that did it - giving clarity also to Ruskins quote - you can teach everything with art..it was all there in that beautiful painting. Which made me also think about the role of religion for Ruskin. We wondered on the idea of spirituality instead of God - i think its about souls.
However in all this it does seem relevant to consider again our question about the role of beauty or aesthetics within this project - what do we mean, what are we trying to say? a nourishment of the soul, through the exposure or deeper consideration to truly amazing things?

What was amazing to see were the large leather bound books of bird illustrations and prints. It made me think more about the relevance of natural history within the Poly-technic or the project - i have been banging on about Bees alot recently. Louise talked of how Ruskin bought stuff he wanted for his own studies/writing and then gave it to the collection. So its in part a collection of cast offs. However i am interested in the support of unknown artists to generate the bulk of collection - its interesting in relation to the Nature of Gothic text - and how he celebrates rudeness/savageness in both the person and their work.

What i suppose seemed valuable was the opportunity to think about collections, the role of archives and objects/art in relation to our project. Im conscious that we dont become to overtly referential of even reverential to this ideas and that in fact we use his work as a starting point and not to lead what we do. So if we look to the Ruskin quote about the The Business of Life at the head of the bid to ACE and think about how that relates to the ideas for creating a study collection we could instead of putting a call out for artists to send proposals we could find the people relevant to ask, but do they have to be savage?  I am i suppose not interested in replicating a collection that already exists in MS or elsewhere but a collection relevant to now and to us and to north sheff and to the needs of the work etc.. However if we continue to refer back to the businees of life quote:
                 Men’s proper business in life falls mainly into three divisions:
                 First, to know themselves, and the existing state of the things they have to do with.
                 Secondly, to be happy in themselves, and in the existing state of things.
                 Thirdly, to mend themselves, and the existing state of things, as far as either are 
                 marred and mendable.
- To Know, To Accept and To Mend becomes of course the 3 sections within the collection and also gives those the job of making something for the collection room to interpret - so it could be a stuffed flamingo [be a flamingo, be dead, be stuffed for us to admire]. But i suppose i worry that we become the gate keepers to what is beautiful and our aesthetic is the lead - i know its our project but i think we should unpick how we choose more, rather than whether it fits the know, accept, mend tripartate. I wonder if we reference in our choice also some of the characteristics within the Gothic essay that make a building/maker good -
1.savageness or rudeness
2. love of change or changefullness
3.Love of nature
4.disturbed imagination or grotesqueness
5.rigidity/obstinancy
6.generosity/redundance
What worries me and i realise i might be going round in circles is that then are we being too obviously linked to the original ruskin texts  - or do we as we did in aura scorer make it relevant to now, but still connected - learn from past but then move on i suppose?